At the Intersection of Resident, Research and Recreation Stakeholder Interests: East Maui, Hawai‘i, as a Sustainable Tourism Destination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experiences of contemporary protected areas indicate adaptations to challenges brought about by resource management strategies. Resident communities, protected area management, and the tourism industry stakeholders demonstrate that evolving relationships are complex webs of competing and cooperating interests. The geographic isolation of East Maui delayed the cultural disruption of traditional practices and is an area where residents simultaneously resist assimilation and re-create cultural landscapes to offer visitors a glimpse into the past and a view of an emerging future associated with the renaissance of Native Hawaiian identity. Partnerships have brought about and nurtured the perpetuation of culture and the conservation of biodiversity as stakeholders recognize shared benefits. Among the outcomes are that residents have reconstituted the identity of East Maui as a Hawaiian place with benefits to various stakeholders, including a network of protected areas. A sustainability framework suggests a reappraisal of how to nurture, not alter, East Maui’s identity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".